First flight EC175

Hans · Post by **Hans** » 17 Dec 2009, 12:27

Hi,

Today was the official first flight of the new Eurocopter EC175 - apparently it took off earlier this month. Some images can be found at http://www.studiopad.com/eurocopter/mai ... &g2_page=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

regards,

Hans

topgun1984 · Post by **topgun1984** » 17 Dec 2009, 12:55

realy nice they did that, but WHO DESIGNED IT!!!... It's realy NOT an attractive piece of machinery... Although it's the Little passenger version of (i suppose) a NH-90. it realy has some design flaws.
[Jeremy Clarkson mode ON] It really looks like a Mil-Mi2 made love to an NH-90 [Jeremy Clarkson mode OFF]...
If you look at the designs of the EC-120 / EC-135 / EC-155 those are nice looking choppers, but this one looks like Bigfoot (only a bit less hairy)...

Grtz,

TG1984

Basman · Post by **Basman** » 17 Dec 2009, 13:06

[James May mode ON] I don't think you can judge a helicopter by the way it looks, as you would do with a car. Aerodynamic efficiency for instance is just a little more important in this case. So if for instance the fuel economy and/or range of this helicopter is better than the competition because of its shape, I wouldn't say it has design flaws.[James May mode OFF]

Okay, maybe not the prettiest of choppers...but what I find more striking: doesn't it look like a copy of an AW139?

Bas

topgun1984 · Post by **topgun1984** » 17 Dec 2009, 13:37

[Richard Hammond mode on]How dare you to compare that Italian beauty with a French Baguette!!! It is Far from a AW-139 lookalike!!![Richard Hammond mode off]

[Jeremy Clarkson mode ON] OK the design flaw was a bit hasty.... But it still looks ugly[Jeremy Clarkson mode OFF]...

Personaly i don't find it a copy from an AW-139... Don't get me wrong i usually like Eurocopter designs but this one i realy don't like

Pete · Post by **Pete** » 17 Dec 2009, 14:22

It looks like a child with hydrocephalus. ( in dutch: kind met een waterhoofd.) Too small airframe to fit the engines + transmission, but hey if if flies better than it looks who cares other than the local hairdresser of a certain type.

Regards Pete

Basman · Post by **Basman** » 17 Dec 2009, 15:05

who cares other than the local hairdresser of a certain type

...who probably would have asked for a convertible version with foldable hardtop.

Bas

topgun1984 · Post by **topgun1984** » 17 Dec 2009, 15:34

Basman wrote:
who cares other than the local hairdresser of a certain type
...who probably would have asked for a convertible version with foldable hardtop.

Bas

Saves money on haircuts then

wamovements · Post by **wamovements** » 17 Dec 2009, 15:48

and we call it a "Super Sokol"

topgun1984 · Post by **topgun1984** » 17 Dec 2009, 15:54

wamovements wrote:and we call it a "Super Sokol"

Thank god im not the only one that see that

Russians 2

Italians 1

but hey, who's counting :drinking:

A Legal Alien · Post by **A Legal Alien** » 17 Dec 2009, 16:06

topgun1984 wrote:Although it's the Little passenger version of (i suppose) a NH-90. it realy has some design flaws.

No connection with the NH90 (the EC175 is strictly a civil app).

Sorry to hear you think it has "some design flaws." Let me know what your concerns are and I'll see if I can put you at ease.

Pete · Post by **Pete** » 17 Dec 2009, 19:39

Sorry to hear you think it has "some design flaws." Let me know what your concerns are and I'll see if I can put you at ease.[/quote]

Well the main gear in retracted position could be more tucked away in any kind of aerodynamic cover or is it intended to be like the main gear of the A-10 Thunderbold. Which has a function if it gets shot down at low altitudes. ( please don't tell me Eurocopter anticipated their helicopters would get shot down by angry hairdressers mentioned above. )

Like i said before if it is safe and flies right i don't care about the looks.
But feel free to put me at ease.

Regards Pete

A Legal Alien · Post by **A Legal Alien** » 17 Dec 2009, 20:03

That's a relevant question. It's actually a safety design feature, related to the fact that the key target markets for the EC175 are primarily utility (offshore, SAR, etc.). As with the AS332/EC225, this approach trades off the aesthetics of a fully retractable gear (and perhaps a knot or two) in favor of the additional safety offered by an exposed gear in the event of a low VS emergency during take-off of landing. So yes, similar to the concept used by the Warthog (and the C-47).

Pete · Post by **Pete** » 17 Dec 2009, 20:21

Well A Legal Alien,

Thanks for your explanation, but why is it that if this helicopter is primairily intended to be used offshore etc. those covers have not been placed yet, because EC-225 has these covers also and these covers hold the flotation devices or liferafts as well.

Regards Pete

A Legal Alien · Post by **A Legal Alien** » 17 Dec 2009, 20:31

Pete -

Can't go into detail, but 'covers' will not be required for the floats & rafts. As you mention, on the Super Puma family these devices are enclosed in the sponson, but a different design approach is used on the EC175. Trust me, they're there!

Post by **Copter** » 17 Dec 2009, 20:47

Looks lika a "monday-morning" AW.139 .......

It really is an ugly helicopter ...

Scramble Messageboard

First flight EC175

First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175

Re: First flight EC175